SB QST @ ARL $ARLB003
ARLB003 ARRL to Propose New Entry-Level License, Code-Free HF Access

ZCZC AG03
QST de W1AW
ARRL Bulletin 3 ARLB003
From ARRL Headquarters
Newington CT January 20, 2004
To all radio amateurs

SB QST ARL ARLB003
ARLB003 ARRL to Propose New Entry-Level License, Code-Free HF Access

The ARRL will ask the FCC to create a new entry-level Amateur Radio
license that would include HF phone privileges without requiring a
Morse code test. The League also will propose consolidating all
current licensees into three classes, retaining the Element 1 Morse
requirement--now 5 WPM-only for the highest class. The ARRL Board of
Directors overwhelmingly approved the plan January 16 during its
Annual Meeting in Windsor, Connecticut. The proposals--developed by
the ARRL Executive Committee following a Board instruction last
July--are in response to changes made in Article 25 of the
international Radio Regulations at World Radiocommunication
Conference 2003 (WRC-03). They would continue a process of
streamlining the amateur licensing structure that the FCC began more
than five years ago but left unfinished in the Amateur Service
license restructuring Report and Order (WT 98-143) that went into
effect April 15, 2000.

''Change in the Amateur Radio Service in the US, especially license
requirements and even more so when Morse is involved, has always
been emotional,'' said ARRL First Vice President Joel Harrison, W5ZN,
in presenting the Executive Committee's recommendations. ''In fact,
without a doubt, Morse is Amateur Radio's 'religious debate.'''

The entry-level license class--being called ''Novice'' for now--would
require a 25-question written exam. It would offer limited HF
CW/data and phone/image privileges on 80, 40, 15 and 10 meters as
well as VHF and UHF privileges on 6 and 2 meters and on 222-225 and
430-450 MHz. Power output would be restricted to 100 W on 80, 40,
and 15 meters and to 50 W on 10 meters and up.

''The Board sought to achieve balance in giving new Novice licensees
the opportunity to sample a wider range of Amateur Radio activity
than is available to current Technicians while retaining a
motivation to upgrade,'' said ARRL CEO David Sumner, K1ZZ. Under the
ARRL plan, current Novice licensees--now the smallest and least
active group of radio amateurs--would be grandfathered to the new
entry-level class without further testing.

The middle group of licensees--Technician, Tech Plus (Technician
with Element 1 credit) and General--would be merged into a new
General license that also would not require a Morse examination.
Current Technician and Tech Plus license holders automatically would
gain current General class privileges without additional testing.
The current Element 3 General examination would remain in place for
new applicants.

The Board indicated that it saw no compelling reason to change the
Amateur Extra class license requirements. The ARRL plan calls on the
FCC to combine the current Advanced and Amateur Extra class
licensees into Amateur Extra, because the technical level of the
exams passed by these licensees is very similar. New applicants for
Extra would have to pass a 5 WPM Morse code examination, but the
written exam would stay the same. Sumner said the Board felt that
the highest level of accomplishment should include basic Morse
capability. Current Novice, Tech Plus and General licensees would
receive lifetime 5 WPM Morse credit.

''This structure provides a true entry-level license with HF
privileges to promote growth in the Amateur Service,'' Harrison said.

Among other advantages, Sumner said the plan would allow new Novices
to participate in HF SSB emergency nets on 75 and 40 meters as well
as on the top 100 kHz of 15 meters. The new license also could get
another name, Sumner said. ''We're trying to recapture the magic of
the old Novice license, but in a manner that's appropriate for the
21st century.''

The overall proposed ARRL license restructuring plan would more
smoothly integrate HF spectrum privileges across the three license
classes and would incorporate the ''Novice refarming'' plan the League
put forth nearly two years ago in a Petition for Rule Making
(RM-10413). The FCC has not yet acted on the ARRL plan, which would
alter current HF subbands.

The ARRL license restructuring design calls for no changes in
privileges for Extra and General class licensees on 160, 60, 30, 20,
17 or 12 meters. Novice licensees would have no access to those
bands.

See ''ARRL to Propose New Entry-Level License, Code-Free HF Access''
on the ARRL Web site, www.arrl.org/news/stories/2004/01/19/1/, for
the specific subband allocations ARRL is proposing for each class.
NNNN
/EX

Gee... I thought the last restructuring was to streamline
the license classes, get rid of the under utilized 'entry'
class license(s), simplify things. Wasn't that the reasoning?
Now here we go 'cluttering' it up again.
Lets see, an 'entry' class license is to 'give people a
taste'
of ham radio, see if they like it, sort of an 'easy start'
license,
right? Seems like I've heard of that before (a few times,
actually).
Wasn't that what a couple of the licenses that got dumped in the
last restructuring were? And by all means, lets give that
'entry'
license a glitzy name so no one will recognize it for what it
is,
wouldn't want to make it obvious, would we? Make it easy for
others
to distinguish between them and the other licensee's? I mean,
you
wouldn't want to be able to 'point a finger' at operators who
are
out of bounds, for instance.
To me, an 'entry' class license shouldn't be 'for ever',
there
should be a reason to up-grade, right? How about making it for
a
limited duration, and non-renewable? Hmmm, where have I heard
that
before? (But you know what, it worked! Oh well, that's a good
reason
not to do it that way again, isn't it?)
What's the matter 'Mr. ARRL'? Not getting that 'huge' influx
of
new hams to buy your magazine? Don't you ever learn anything?
How
about doing what you're supposed to be doing? Hey, that would
be a
refreshing change!
'Doc

Pretty much agree with Doc, altho, after the last "restructureing", the
value of a
license is worthless! And now, the league wants to degrade it even more ??
Why even have a test?? Just issue licenses on the back of cereal boxes, or
inside
Cracker Jack boxes, or like about 45 years ago, when Popular Electronics
issued
their SWL calls (Think mine was WPE7AYQ) !! Or, even better: Lets auction
off
ALL THE SPECTRUM, for amateur bands to the highest bidders, and balance our
federal
deficit! Then we can ALL share the blissful 40 channels in the eleven meter
band!!
Maybe, also all those free band channels, up to, and sometimes includeing
the CW segment
of 10 meters!! Yeh, that the (pardon the pun) TICKET !! NN7K Jim




"'Doc" sent:
Gee... I thought the last restructuring was to streamline
the license classes, get rid of the under utilized 'entry'
class license(s), simplify things. Wasn't that the reasoning?
Now here we go 'cluttering' it up again.
Lets see, an 'entry' class license is to 'give people a
taste'
of ham radio, see if they like it, sort of an 'easy start'
license,
right? Seems like I've heard of that before (a few times,
actually).
Wasn't that what a couple of the licenses that got dumped in the
last restructuring were? And by all means, lets give that
'entry'
license a glitzy name so no one will recognize it for what it
is,
wouldn't want to make it obvious, would we? Make it easy for
others
to distinguish between them and the other licensee's? I mean,
you
wouldn't want to be able to 'point a finger' at operators who
are
out of bounds, for instance.
To me, an 'entry' class license shouldn't be 'for ever',
there
should be a reason to up-grade, right? How about making it for
a
limited duration, and non-renewable? Hmmm, where have I heard
that
before? (But you know what, it worked! Oh well, that's a good
reason
not to do it that way again, isn't it?)
What's the matter 'Mr. ARRL'? Not getting that 'huge' influx
of
new hams to buy your magazine? Don't you ever learn anything?
How
about doing what you're supposed to be doing? Hey, that would
be a
refreshing change!
'Doc

Jim wrote:
Pretty much agree with Doc, altho, after the last "restructureing", the
value of a license is worthless!

The only value in a license are the privileges granted. The privileges
granted haven't changed appreciably. I had full access to all ham bands
in 1953 and I still have full access to all ham bands in 2004. I lost
11m and 220 MHz but gained the WARC bands. The value of my license is
very close to what it was in 1953.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

We will determine the true worth, when the next set of rule changes, will
allow ARRL to auction licenses on E-Bay.

"Bill Turner" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 15:26:29 -0800, "Jim" wrote:

the value of a license is worthless!

__________________________________________________ _______

Until you get hauled into court for transmitting without one. Then
you'd find it quite worthwhile.

--
Bill, W6WRT

I wonder if the guys that are claiming that the license is so easy to get
could pass the test for their current grade? I bet a few of them would do a
lot worse than they would ever admit to.


--
John Passaneau, W3JXP
Penn State University



"W4JLE" w4jle(remove to wrote in message
...
We will determine the true worth, when the next set of rule changes, will
allow ARRL to auction licenses on E-Bay.

"Bill Turner" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 15:26:29 -0800, "Jim" wrote:

the value of a license is worthless!

__________________________________________________ _______

Until you get hauled into court for transmitting without one. Then
you'd find it quite worthwhile.

--
Bill, W6WRT

In article , John Passaneau
writes
I wonder if the guys that are claiming that the license is so easy to get
could pass the test for their current grade? I bet a few of them would do a
lot worse than they would ever admit to.


As an ARRL Volunteer Examiner, I think the multiple guess tests are far
too easy. But, that is what is mandated to be the standard so that is
what we as examiners have to test!!!

Before the last restructure I always used to think the Advanced test was
the most difficult *technical* exam, but of course they done away with
that because it caused a major stumbling block for a lot of fairly non-
technical people trying for an Extra license. Isn't Amateur Radio a
technical pursuit? So shouldn't we be examining at the appropriate
technical level? Currently, we are not. The same happened with the
20wpm Morse test which they made a joke of by lowering it to 5wpm and
now they are killing it off completely. Maybe that was stopping people
getting to the top level when they weren't prepared to put in the
effort. That would never do in this day of 'everything for nothing'.

Welcome to the world of mediocrity which the RSGB in this country have
been pursuing for years by trying to kill off Morse testing (even though
the majority of their members voted to keep it!!!!!!). Of course, like
the squeaky wheel, they won in the end......

RIP Amateur Radio as a technical pursuit.

Andrew Williamson GI0NWG / AC6WI
Homepage = http://www.gi0nwg.freeserve.co.uk/

One of the ZL9CI gang
http://www.qsl.net/zl9ci/

In article , Bill Turner
writes
On Thu, 22 Jan 2004 16:41:21 +0000, andrew wrote:

RIP Amateur Radio as a technical pursuit.

_________________________________________________ ________

I sympathize with your feelings Andrew, but Amateur Radio is changing
and there's little we can do about it.

I have homebrewed more stuff than I can remember but those days are
gone. I am proud of the complete 40 meter mobile SSB rig I designed and
built from scratch, but I would not expect anyone these days to
duplicate the feat. It's just not cost-effective and the technology is
so much better now besides.

We need to focus on what Amateur Radio needs to become and not get
dragged down by pining for the olden days.

Although a little reminiscing now and then is ok by me. :-)

Hi Bill,

Don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting that everyone should be able to
design and build a transceiver from scratch (I know I couldn't).
However, I do have enough knowledge to troubleshoot and fix problems
when I let the smoke out of something!!!

Personally, I believe that in a technical hobby the participants should
at least have a reasonable technical knowledge so they can understand
what they are doing instead of ignorantly causing untold QRM after
they've twiddled pots inside the radio. The current examining system is
not testing for that, and they are now going to make it even easier.....

If it was as easy to get a driving licence as it is to get a ham licence
today, there would be absolute carnage on the roads because the new
drivers would have no knowledge about the theoretical side (i.e. the
highway code in the UK or whatever the equivalent is in the States). If
people don't want to put the effort in to learn the technical side then
they should stick to the area of the radio hobby that uses type approved
equipment (i.e. CB). Come to think of it, the new M3 licence in the UK
is restricted to using type approved equipment... Hmmmm.

One other thing, I don't really pine for the 'old days' as the old days
of amateur radio to me is around 1990 when I was licensed (I'm still
only 33 years old)

Andrew Williamson GI0NWG / AC6WI
Homepage = http://www.gi0nwg.freeserve.co.uk/

One of the ZL9CI gang
http://www.qsl.net/zl9ci/

I for one, would take the present test anytime, any place, and if I don't
get 90% plus you can have my ticket.

Doubtful that I am alone. I suspect that most of the old farts, like myself,
would tell you the same thing.

"John Passaneau" wrote in message
...
I wonder if the guys that are claiming that the license is so easy to get
could pass the test for their current grade? I bet a few of them would do
a
lot worse than they would ever admit to.


--
John Passaneau, W3JXP
Penn State University



"W4JLE" w4jle(remove to wrote in message
...
We will determine the true worth, when the next set of rule changes,
will
allow ARRL to auction licenses on E-Bay.

"Bill Turner" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 15:26:29 -0800, "Jim" wrote:

the value of a license is worthless!

__________________________________________________ _______

Until you get hauled into court for transmitting without one. Then
you'd find it quite worthwhile.

--
Bill, W6WRT

To avoid all the ****ing and moaning on an individual basis, everyone stand
up and say, in unison, "I had to take the code test so should everyone else,
boo hoo hoo".



"Lloyd Mitchell" wrote in message
.. .
SB QST @ ARL $ARLB003
ARLB003 ARRL to Propose New Entry-Level License, Code-Free HF Access

ZCZC AG03
QST de W1AW
ARRL Bulletin 3 ARLB003
From ARRL Headquarters
Newington CT January 20, 2004
To all radio amateurs

SB QST ARL ARLB003
ARLB003 ARRL to Propose New Entry-Level License, Code-Free HF Access

The ARRL will ask the FCC to create a new entry-level Amateur Radio
license that would include HF phone privileges without requiring a
Morse code test. The League also will propose consolidating all
current licensees into three classes, retaining the Element 1 Morse
requirement--now 5 WPM-only for the highest class. The ARRL Board of
Directors overwhelmingly approved the plan January 16 during its
Annual Meeting in Windsor, Connecticut. The proposals--developed by
the ARRL Executive Committee following a Board instruction last
July--are in response to changes made in Article 25 of the
international Radio Regulations at World Radiocommunication
Conference 2003 (WRC-03). They would continue a process of
streamlining the amateur licensing structure that the FCC began more
than five years ago but left unfinished in the Amateur Service
license restructuring Report and Order (WT 98-143) that went into
effect April 15, 2000.

''Change in the Amateur Radio Service in the US, especially license
requirements and even more so when Morse is involved, has always
been emotional,'' said ARRL First Vice President Joel Harrison, W5ZN,
in presenting the Executive Committee's recommendations. ''In fact,
without a doubt, Morse is Amateur Radio's 'religious debate.'''

The entry-level license class--being called ''Novice'' for now--would
require a 25-question written exam. It would offer limited HF
CW/data and phone/image privileges on 80, 40, 15 and 10 meters as
well as VHF and UHF privileges on 6 and 2 meters and on 222-225 and
430-450 MHz. Power output would be restricted to 100 W on 80, 40,
and 15 meters and to 50 W on 10 meters and up.

''The Board sought to achieve balance in giving new Novice licensees
the opportunity to sample a wider range of Amateur Radio activity
than is available to current Technicians while retaining a
motivation to upgrade,'' said ARRL CEO David Sumner, K1ZZ. Under the
ARRL plan, current Novice licensees--now the smallest and least
active group of radio amateurs--would be grandfathered to the new
entry-level class without further testing.

The middle group of licensees--Technician, Tech Plus (Technician
with Element 1 credit) and General--would be merged into a new
General license that also would not require a Morse examination.
Current Technician and Tech Plus license holders automatically would
gain current General class privileges without additional testing.
The current Element 3 General examination would remain in place for
new applicants.

The Board indicated that it saw no compelling reason to change the
Amateur Extra class license requirements. The ARRL plan calls on the
FCC to combine the current Advanced and Amateur Extra class
licensees into Amateur Extra, because the technical level of the
exams passed by these licensees is very similar. New applicants for
Extra would have to pass a 5 WPM Morse code examination, but the
written exam would stay the same. Sumner said the Board felt that
the highest level of accomplishment should include basic Morse
capability. Current Novice, Tech Plus and General licensees would
receive lifetime 5 WPM Morse credit.

''This structure provides a true entry-level license with HF
privileges to promote growth in the Amateur Service,'' Harrison said.

Among other advantages, Sumner said the plan would allow new Novices
to participate in HF SSB emergency nets on 75 and 40 meters as well
as on the top 100 kHz of 15 meters. The new license also could get
another name, Sumner said. ''We're trying to recapture the magic of
the old Novice license, but in a manner that's appropriate for the
21st century.''

The overall proposed ARRL license restructuring plan would more
smoothly integrate HF spectrum privileges across the three license
classes and would incorporate the ''Novice refarming'' plan the League
put forth nearly two years ago in a Petition for Rule Making
(RM-10413). The FCC has not yet acted on the ARRL plan, which would
alter current HF subbands.

The ARRL license restructuring design calls for no changes in
privileges for Extra and General class licensees on 160, 60, 30, 20,
17 or 12 meters. Novice licensees would have no access to those
bands.

See ''ARRL to Propose New Entry-Level License, Code-Free HF Access''
on the ARRL Web site, www.arrl.org/news/stories/2004/01/19/1/, for
the specific subband allocations ARRL is proposing for each class.
NNNN
/EX